Karnataka High Court
Sri S Lakshmana vs The State Of Karnataka on 17 March, 2025
Author: N S Sanjay Gowda
Bench: N S Sanjay Gowda
-1-
NC: 2025:KHC:10876
WP No. 4250 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH, 2025
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
WRIT PETITION NO. 4250 OF 2025 (KLR-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SRI S LAKSHMANA
S/O. LATE.SRI.M. SHAMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS,
RESIDING AT CHUNCHAGATTA,
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
BENGALURU-560 062.
2. SRI. RAMA
S/O. LATE.SRI.M. SHAMANNA,
AGED ABOUT 50 YEARS,
RESIDING AT CHUNCHAGATTA,
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
BENGALURU-560 062
Digitally 3. SMT. VARALAKSHMI
signed by
KIRAN W/O. LATE. SRI. KANTHARAJU,
KUMAR R
Location:
AGED ABOUT 42 YEARS,
HIGH
COURT OF
RESIDING AT CHUNCHAGATTA,
KARNATAKA UTTARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU SOUTH TALUK,
BENGALURU-560 062
4. SRI. VINAY. K
S/O. LATE KANTRAJU,
AGED ABOUT 23 YEARS,
R/AT NO.53/3,
CHUNCHAGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
KONANAKUNTE POST,
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI,
-2-
NC: 2025:KHC:10876
WP No. 4250 of 2025
BENGALURU 560 062
5. SRI. HARSHITHA C.K.
D/O LATE KANTRAJU,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
R/AT NO.53/3,
CHUNCHAGHATTA MAIN ROAD,
KONANAKUNTE POST,
UTTARAHALLI HOBLI,
BENGALURU 560 062.
...PETITIONERS
(BY SRI. DILIP KUMAR I S., ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
REPRESENTED BY,
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
M.S BUILDING,
DR. B. R AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
BENGALURU-560 001.
2. THE DEPUTY COMMISIONER
BENGALURU DISTRICT
DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OFFICE,
BENGALURU -560 001
3. THE ASSISTANT COMMISIONER
BENGALURU SOUTH SUB-DIVISION,
BENGALURU-560 002
4. THE TAHSILDAR
THE SOUTH TALUK, BENGALURU-562 110
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI. K.MANJUNATH., HCGP)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO DIRECTING THE
R2 TO CONSIDER THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONERS
-3-
NC: 2025:KHC:10876
WP No. 4250 of 2025
DATED 21/01/2025 PRODUCED AS ANNEXURE-A TO RESTORE
THE NAME OF PETITIONERS IN THE RTC EXTRACTS OF LAND
IN SY.NO. 70 OF CHUNCHAGHATTA VILLAGE TO AN EXTEN OF
01 ACRES WHICH IS SCHEDULED LAND HEREIN, IN ITS BOTH
KABJIDAR COLUMN NO. 9 AND CULTIVATORS COLUMN NO.
12(2) AS EXPEDITIOUSLY, ETC.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY
HEARING, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:
CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA
ORAL ORDER
1. The prayer in this writ petition is for issuance of a
direction to consider the representation of the
petitioners dated 21.01.2025, a copy of which is
produced at Annexure - A.
2. It is the case of the petitioners that, they had
instituted a suit in O.S.No.5676/2012 against the
State before the XXXIX Additional City Civil and
Sessions Judge, Bengaluru and the said Court by
judgment and decree dated 01.12.2022 decreed the
suit and held that the petitioners herein were the
NC: 2025:KHC:10876
owners in possession of the schedule land. The Civil
Court, in fact, passed a specific order in the following
terms:
"The defendants No.3 and 4 are hereby
directed to restore the name of original plaintiff
in the RTC extracts of land in Sy.No.70 of
Chunchaghatta village to an extent of 01 acre
which is schedule land herein, in its both
kabjidar column No.9 and cultivator's column
No.12(2)".
3. It is the grievance of the petitioners that, this order
has not been challenged and, despite the lapse of
nearly three years, the decree has not been given
effect to.
4. He has also pointed out that, the petitioners had
approached this Court earlier in W.P.No.13486/2023
and, despite an order passed by this Court on
04.09.2023 directing the Authorities that decision
would be taken within a period of three months, the
NC: 2025:KHC:10876
decree of the Trial Court has remained unfulfilled till
today.
5. In this view of the matter, in my view, it would be
appropriate to direct the respondents Nos.3 and 4 to
implement the order of the Trial Court and ensure
that the decree holders names are reflected. Since
the Trial Court directed the name of the original
grantee i.e., Shamanna to be restored and, since he
is no more, it is obvious that respondent Nos.3 and 4
will have to enter the names of his legal
representative i.e., plaintiffs 1(a) to 1(c)(iii) in
O.S.No.5676/2012.
6. This order shall be complied within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of the copy of this
order.
7. It is however necessary to state here that, if the
State decides to file an appeal against this order, the
entries that would be made pursuant to the decree
NC: 2025:KHC:10876
passed in O.S.No.5676/2012 would be subject to the
result of such an appeal.
8. This writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
9. In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending
interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.
Sd/-
(N S SANJAY GOWDA)
JUDGE
